World Families Forums - R1b1b2 in Sweden

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 01, 2014, 09:15:03 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  R1b1b2 in Sweden
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R1b1b2 in Sweden  (Read 11844 times)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #50 on: July 25, 2010, 07:08:32 AM »

Hmmm . . .

Interesting. I still don't think that alters the fact that the overall distribution of P312+ (all of it, not just P312*) is a better fit for Celtic than Germanic and that the reverse is true for U106. You still have the problem of the apparent gap between the P312+ regions of Germany (middle and SW Germany) and Scandinavia.

I know there were Beaker settlements in SW Norway that are believed to have come from Jutland. Anyone know any more about that?

I wonder if the U106 in Denmark is pretty near universally L48+.

What we have are

1. some areas where S116 clades are very predominant over U106 (most of the old Celtic world)

2. areas where the reverse is true (apparently fairly restricted to Holland, north Germany etc)

3. areas where there is a real mixture of the two (Scandinavia, England etc).

The simplest interpretation is that U106 originated in area 2 and then expanded into the very mixed area 3 zone where it either overlaid or was layer overlaid by S116 but failed to make it into area 1 in any numbers.   The result was that S116 clades seem to predominate in Celtic areas but also form a strata in the northernmost Germanic areas so the cultural match is not simple.  However, that may because we set too much in stone the linguistic distribution of the very late Iron Age when we know in fact that language barriers constantly shift.  While S116 seems complex, I still would feel deep down that U106 owes a lot Germanic expansions.  Unlike the S116 in Scandinavia issue, I am not aware of an area of high U106 which is not explainable by Germanic movements.  This is a total guess but I wonder if S116 held a wider (seaborne?) dominance at some point in the copper and bronze age than it later lost to U106 elements. 
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #51 on: July 25, 2010, 03:59:44 PM »


I wonder if the U106 in Denmark is pretty near universally L48+.

I have wondered about that myself. Unfortunately the way the U106 project is organized- by geographic area rather than by subclade- makes it difficult to make this determination. Also they do not identify U106*, so it is impossible to distinguish between those who have tested negative for L48 and those who haven't tested for it.

As I have said before, the U106 project makes any attempt to analyze them by subclade extremely difficult. Perhaps this is one reason people tend to treat it as monolithic, when it clearly isn't.
Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #52 on: July 25, 2010, 06:15:40 PM »


I wonder if the U106 in Denmark is pretty near universally L48+.

I have wondered about that myself. Unfortunately the way the U106 project is organized- by geographic area rather than by subclade- makes it difficult to make this determination. Also they do not identify U106*, so it is impossible to distinguish between those who have tested negative for L48 and those who haven't tested for it.

As I have said before, the U106 project makes any attempt to analyze them by subclade extremely difficult. Perhaps this is one reason people tend to treat it as monolithic, when it clearly isn't.

Yeah, I can vouch for this as well. My maternal grandfather is L48- (Schaefer, Palatinate, Germany), but he is among those in the same category who tested L48+.
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #53 on: July 25, 2010, 06:18:39 PM »


I wonder if the U106 in Denmark is pretty near universally L48+.

I have wondered about that myself. Unfortunately the way the U106 project is organized- by geographic area rather than by subclade- makes it difficult to make this determination. Also they do not identify U106*, so it is impossible to distinguish between those who have tested negative for L48 and those who haven't tested for it.

As I have said before, the U106 project makes any attempt to analyze them by subclade extremely difficult. Perhaps this is one reason people tend to treat it as monolithic, when it clearly isn't.

I looked again at the U106 project, and found that members are classified by subclade on the results page, as opposed to the Ydna results page. One then has to compare the two pages. Unfortunately I couldn't reconcile the results on the two different pages. But as far as I can tell, all the U106 from Denmark are either L48 or untested for L48 (mostly the latter).
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #54 on: July 25, 2010, 06:34:41 PM »

Since I had a little time today, I thought it might be instructive to look at the various project results for northern Germany. First I had to decide exactly what area to define as northern Germany. I settled on a line running roughly east/west from Osnabrück thropugh Hannover to Berlin. I didn't go east beyond the present day Polish border into the old Prussian territories ceeded after WWII for a number of reasons. One is that those areas were settled by Germans during the middle ages, and they could have come from anywhere in Germany.

Secondly, I excluded all those entries whose markers was placed in Berlin as the capitol as the actual place of origin in Germany was unknown.

I only looked at the various project maps.

The results:

U106: 9
U198: 1
P312*: 5
L21: 4
U152: 2

I used the FTDNA project for U152 rather than Faux's statistics. I also looked at the L1 project, but they don't maintain a map, and almost all of the surnames were British, only a very few German surnames.

Adding them up, one gets this result:

U106: 10
P312: 11

I don't claim these results are scientifically valid, but it does appear to me that the idea that current testing results demonstrate a dominance of U106 over P312 in northern Germany is incorrect. One can only come to that conclusion if one compares all of U106 against P312 divided into subclades, which is something I think we are all guilty of.

I invite anyone to look at the U106 project map and then zoom in on Germany. There is no heavy concentration in northern Germany. The concentrations appear to be along the North Sea coast and again in the area around Frankfurt/ Mannheim.

So where is the evidence that U106 is so dominant in northern Germany?
« Last Edit: July 25, 2010, 06:38:29 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #55 on: July 25, 2010, 09:21:16 PM »

I don't know that I have the motivation or time to examine this myself, but it seems to me you have drawn an arbitrary line to define your "Northern Germany". I would look for a more historic definition based perhaps on the major dialect divisions and run the southern boundary line of Northern Germany roughly from Köln to Dresden or, if that seems slightly too far south, from Düsseldorf to Leipzig.

Secondly, if you are drawing your ten U106+ from Northern Germany from the R1b-U106 Project's map, the one provided by FTDNA, I have to tell you those maps are notoriously inaccurate. What appears on those is determined entirely by project members. Many project members do not bother to enter a location on their "Plot Ancestral Locations" pages, and many of those who do never take the next step to have a pin placed in the project map at that location. So, what you are getting from those maps is probably an undercount. You would be getting merely those of North German ancestry who bothered to enter a location for their ancestor on their Plot Ancestral Locations pages.

Google maps like the ones I keep are far more accurate. They take a lot of work because I personally communicate with members to make sure the info is correct and squares with what they believe is the correct location. Often there is a conflict between what is in Ysearch and what is in "Plot Ancestral Locations" that can only be resolved by checking with the person.

Thirdly, you would be better off with Faux's database when it comes to U152. I know that he communicates with those on his page and questions them closely about their ancestral origins. Regardless of his own theories, he is pretty scrupulous about reporting honestly. When Faux says of German U152 (as he does on his database page), "None to date north of Koblenz", I think you can take that to the bank. Believe me, he has checked and double-checked.

I haven't attempted the bean counting you have, but I am pretty confident there are more than ten U106ers with ancestry in Northern Germany in the various FTDNA projects. I know what follows is anecdotal, but I can tell you from hunting for suitable recruits for both the R-P312 and Subclades Project and the R-L21 Plus Project that northern Germany is loaded with U106+. Some of them have not yet been tested but have 492=13 or the even more significant and telling combination of 390=23 together with 492=13.

I have to confess that this is something I don't care enough about to do the necessary footwork to get a really good, accurate overview of the distribution of U106. Nevertheless, I think my impression is fairly accurate: for every three North German R1b1b2s, two will be U106+ and one will be some kind of P312+. I think the reverse is true in SW Germany.

I have to work from personal experience because I don't know of an easily accessible source for U106 stats in North Germany. My personal experience consists of checking many many R1b1b2 haplotypes in Ysearch and elsewhere for matches, looking for project recruits. I have also had a lot of experience with U106+ and likely U106+ guys who have joined either the R-P312 and Subclades Project or the R-L21 Plus Project by mistake.

Probably Mike Maddi would be a good source for U106 stats, but I am not sure he would come here and share them.

« Last Edit: July 25, 2010, 09:22:13 PM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #56 on: July 26, 2010, 09:04:01 AM »

I've been looking back over this stuff a little (not much though), and I must say, Goldenhind brings up some good points. I'm still not convinced he is right, and I still think the overall distribution of P312+ is a better fit for Celtic than Germanic, but what he has written does raise some questions about what we have been led to believe about U106.

I think the thing to do would be to test a random sample of 50 or so North German R1b1b2s and see how they come out. Choosing the sample would be tough. If you allow too many of those with 390=23, you are going to get a disproportionate number of U106+, so you would have to try to get a representative sample of North German R1b1b2 haplotypes.

In his old (2005) paper entitled, "Variations of R1b Ydna in Europe: Distribution and Origins", A.A. Foster reported that

Quote
Within the North Sea-Baltic area (Northern  Germany, Denmark, Netherlands and Norway) a sample of 1,227 haplotypes showed the R1b DYS390 percentages to be:    

DYS 390=25... 10.1%.

DYS 390=24... 46.6%.

DYS 390=23... 38.1%.

DYS 390=22...   3.7%
.

Although some 390=23 is P312+, 23 at 390 is disproportionately represented within U106.

Foster did not report on how much of that 390=23 was North German or on how he defined "Northern Germany".

Perhaps the easiest path would be to just use the figures he supplied and get haplotypes with those values at 390 in the proportions he listed. I would go with 12-marker haplotypes, so that it would not be possible to predict the outcome and stack the deck one way or the other (in other words, you would be blind regarding 492).

The sample population could be recruited from the Germany Project, but one would have to be careful to screen potential recruits to try to be sure their ancestry is genuinely North German. Donations could probably be raised and a general fund created specifically for such a project.

Ideally, every sample would get FTDNA's Deep Clade-R test, and it might even be possible to convince FTDNA to offer a slight price break [why that d-word for "price break" cannot be used here baffles me] of some kind. If money were a real concern (and when is it not?), it might be possible to get FTDNA to just test the samples minimally for P312 and U106 and to report only on those two SNPs.

You know, this is not a bad idea, if I do say so myself. I wonder if one could just create new FTDNA projects based on member/donor-funded SNP testing. I mean, that is a big part of our raison d'être in the R-L21 Plus Project, and we have been pretty successful at doing it.

I guess the big issue might be territorial jealousy. If one set up a project for SNP testing Germans, for example, he might run afoul of the guys who administer the Germany Project, and so on.

Any thoughts?
« Last Edit: July 26, 2010, 09:09:57 AM by rms2 » Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #57 on: July 27, 2010, 02:51:31 PM »

I don't know that I have the motivation or time to examine this myself, but it seems to me you have drawn an arbitrary line to define your "Northern Germany". I would look for a more historic definition based perhaps on the major dialect divisions and run the southern boundary line of Northern Germany roughly from Köln to Dresden or, if that seems slightly too far south, from Düsseldorf to Leipzig.

Secondly, if you are drawing your ten U106+ from Northern Germany from the R1b-U106 Project's map, the one provided by FTDNA, I have to tell you those maps are notoriously inaccurate. What appears on those is determined entirely by project members. Many project members do not bother to enter a location on their "Plot Ancestral Locations" pages, and many of those who do never take the next step to have a pin placed in the project map at that location. So, what you are getting from those maps is probably an undercount. You would be getting merely those of North German ancestry who bothered to enter a location for their ancestor on their Plot Ancestral Locations pages.

Google maps like the ones I keep are far more accurate. They take a lot of work because I personally communicate with members to make sure the info is correct and squares with what they believe is the correct location. Often there is a conflict between what is in Ysearch and what is in "Plot Ancestral Locations" that can only be resolved by checking with the person.

Thirdly, you would be better off with Faux's database when it comes to U152. I know that he communicates with those on his page and questions them closely about their ancestral origins. Regardless of his own theories, he is pretty scrupulous about reporting honestly. When Faux says of German U152 (as he does on his database page), "None to date north of Koblenz", I think you can take that to the bank. Believe me, he has checked and double-checked.

I haven't attempted the bean counting you have, but I am pretty confident there are more than ten U106ers with ancestry in Northern Germany in the various FTDNA projects. I know what follows is anecdotal, but I can tell you from hunting for suitable recruits for both the R-P312 and Subclades Project and the R-L21 Plus Project that northern Germany is loaded with U106+. Some of them have not yet been tested but have 492=13 or the even more significant and telling combination of 390=23 together with 492=13.

I have to confess that this is something I don't care enough about to do the necessary footwork to get a really good, accurate overview of the distribution of U106. Nevertheless, I think my impression is fairly accurate: for every three North German R1b1b2s, two will be U106+ and one will be some kind of P312+. I think the reverse is true in SW Germany.

I have to work from personal experience because I don't know of an easily accessible source for U106 stats in North Germany. My personal experience consists of checking many many R1b1b2 haplotypes in Ysearch and elsewhere for matches, looking for project recruits. I have also had a lot of experience with U106+ and likely U106+ guys who have joined either the R-P312 and Subclades Project or the R-L21 Plus Project by mistake.

Probably Mike Maddi would be a good source for U106 stats, but I am not sure he would come here and share them.



Any line one chooses to divide north from south Germany is arbitrary. I chose Osnabrück/Hannover/Berlin because it formed a generally east to west line that was easily identifiable on the Google maps and it isolated the northernmost portion of the country, including a large swath of the north German plain that runs across the country. If U106 was truly so dominant in northern Germany, I would have expected to find evidence of it in the northernmost portion of the country.

You may well be right that the U106 project map isn't as inclusive as those you maintain for L21 and P312*. But surely that must apply across the board, and not just to those members from northern Germany. Look at the map and zoom in on Germany. The heaviest concentration isn't in northern Germany, but rather in an area extending south from the Frankfurt area.

As for U152, I don't claim it has a strong presence in northern Germany. Two results in many years of testing would indicate otherwise. There were actually three listed on the FTDNA U152 project map, but I excluded one because he appeared to be of possible Lithuanian origin. I don't take what Faux has to say on anything as gospel, because I know he has a tendency to find some way to  data which does not correspond with his preconceptions.
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #58 on: July 27, 2010, 03:14:14 PM »

I've been looking back over this stuff a little (not much though), and I must say, Goldenhind brings up some good points. I'm still not convinced he is right, and I still think the overall distribution of P312+ is a better fit for Celtic than Germanic, but what he has written does raise some questions about what we have been led to believe about U106.

I think the thing to do would be to test a random sample of 50 or so North German R1b1b2s and see how they come out. Choosing the sample would be tough. If you allow too many of those with 390=23, you are going to get a disproportionate number of U106+, so you would have to try to get a representative sample of North German R1b1b2 haplotypes.

In his old (2005) paper entitled, "Variations of R1b Ydna in Europe: Distribution and Origins", A.A. Foster reported that

Quote
Within the North Sea-Baltic area (Northern  Germany, Denmark, Netherlands and Norway) a sample of 1,227 haplotypes showed the R1b DYS390 percentages to be:    

DYS 390=25... 10.1%.

DYS 390=24... 46.6%.

DYS 390=23... 38.1%.

DYS 390=22...   3.7%
.

Although some 390=23 is P312+, 23 at 390 is disproportionately represented within U106.

Foster did not report on how much of that 390=23 was North German or on how he defined "Northern Germany".

Perhaps the easiest path would be to just use the figures he supplied and get haplotypes with those values at 390 in the proportions he listed. I would go with 12-marker haplotypes, so that it would not be possible to predict the outcome and stack the deck one way or the other (in other words, you would be blind regarding 492).

The sample population could be recruited from the Germany Project, but one would have to be careful to screen potential recruits to try to be sure their ancestry is genuinely North German. Donations could probably be raised and a general fund created specifically for such a project.

Ideally, every sample would get FTDNA's Deep Clade-R test, and it might even be possible to convince FTDNA to offer a slight price break [why that d-word for "price break" cannot be used here baffles me] of some kind. If money were a real concern (and when is it not?), it might be possible to get FTDNA to just test the samples minimally for P312 and U106 and to report only on those two SNPs.

You know, this is not a bad idea, if I do say so myself. I wonder if one could just create new FTDNA projects based on member/donor-funded SNP testing. I mean, that is a big part of our raison d'être in the R-L21 Plus Project, and we have been pretty successful at doing it.

I guess the big issue might be territorial jealousy. If one set up a project for SNP testing Germans, for example, he might run afoul of the guys who administer the Germany Project, and so on.

Any thoughts?


DYS 390 isn't a reliable predictor of U106/P312 status, and focusing on it won't provide accurate results. Also 390=23 is a characteristic of the Frisian cluster, which only constitutes a portion of one U106 subclade (L48- per Maddi). One of the points I am trying to make is that one shouldn't define all of U106 by the characteristics of only one of its constituent parts.

One could focus on 492 results from members of the Germany project from north Germany who have tested 67 markers. However even this marker only gives results with an accuracy of only around 90%, and one is still left with the problem of defining north Germany. Perhaps Alan, Jean (are you there Jean?) or someone else would care to chime in where they think the line should be drawn.

In looking at the FTDNA projects though, one must keep in mind that U106 has had the advantage of several years of testing over P312 and L21, so one would expect U106 to have a strong numerical advantage in any area where they form roughly equal portions.

What is really needed is random sampling of a large number of R1bs from northern Germany.

If you were to focus on SNP testing of likely P312 in Scandinavia and north Germany, in much the same way you have done with France and Iberia, we might find the P312 subclades have a much stronger presence there than most people believe.

Finally let me make it clear that I do not claim that P312 isn't outnumbered by U106 in northern Germany. That may or may not be, but I am beginning to suspect that the case has been overstated, and that the concentration of U106 in Germany isn't in fact in the far north of the country. I am also beginning to suspect that whatever presence U106 does have in north Germany may be largely composed of only a portion of U106, and does not apply to all of its subclades.

« Last Edit: July 27, 2010, 03:43:06 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #59 on: July 27, 2010, 04:13:24 PM »

I think a big part of the problem is the sampling process, like you said GoldenHind.

There is bound to be more P312* and subclades in Scandinavia. There are still some Danish and Dutch folks who are unaccounted for, yet L21+ on the FTDNA Haplotree page. But I know it is near impossible to contact them.

I have perused the Sorenson database and actually found a number of Scandinavian matches to the Irish Sea Modal. The Norwegian matches are really close to our Norwegian and Western Scottish L159+. So I think a complete, random sample like you guys are talking about would do wonders in improving our understanding of Scandinavian R1b1b2.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2010, 04:14:59 PM by NealtheRed » Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #60 on: July 28, 2010, 08:18:50 AM »


. . .

Any line one chooses to divide north from south Germany is arbitrary.

Not really. A line could be drawn, as I pointed out, that corresponds more closely with the old northern, Niederdeutsch or "Plattdeutsch" dialect division of Germany. Your line was too far north to correspond to that. A line from to Düsseldorf to Leipzig or Köln to Dresden would be much more accurate.

Such a line would not be arbitrary at all but would actually be based on the traditional notion of what is northern Germany, which is only partly about geography.

You may well be right that the U106 project map isn't as inclusive as those you maintain for L21 and P312*. But surely that must apply across the board, and not just to those members from northern Germany. Look at the map and zoom in on Germany. The heaviest concentration isn't in northern Germany, but rather in an area extending south from the Frankfurt area.

It does apply across the board, but you were talking about Northern Germany and the number of U106ers there, so the number of U106ers missed on other parts of the map isn't really relevant. The number of North German U106ers missed on the R1b-U106 Project map is a potential problem if you were relying on it.

As for U152, I don't claim it has a strong presence in northern Germany. Two results in many years of testing would indicate otherwise. There were actually three listed on the FTDNA U152 project map, but I excluded one because he appeared to be of possible Lithuanian origin. I don't take what Faux has to say on anything as gospel, because I know he has a tendency to find some way to  data which does not correspond with his preconceptions.

I have had my share of issues with Faux, but I know he screens what he reports on his database very carefully, and the U152 Project does not. I think he probably found that those "North German" U152s were not actually of North German origin. In fact, he reports that one, Stampa, has a Swiss match of the same surname and actually originated in Switzerland. I cannot confirm that, and I am not going to bother to check it out, but I suspect Faux is right, because I know he does bother to check.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 08:20:34 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #61 on: July 28, 2010, 08:36:13 AM »


DYS 390 isn't a reliable predictor of U106/P312 status, and focusing on it won't provide accurate results. Also 390=23 is a characteristic of the Frisian cluster, which only constitutes a portion of one U106 subclade (L48- per Maddi). One of the points I am trying to make is that one shouldn't define all of U106 by the characteristics of only one of its constituent parts.

390=23 isn't reliable as an absolute predictor of U106+ status (I never said it was), but it is a fairly reasonable predictor of the likelihood that one is U106+, especially in locations like Northern Germany.

It is a fact that 390=23 is more frequent within U106 than in other R1b1b2 subclades. That is especially true in Northern Europe.

Besides, I never said one should focus on 390=23. What I said was that its presence in a North German testing pool would have to be balanced or one would get a result that would be skewed to U106+. And that is a fact.

390=23 in U106 is common enough that I generally will not pay for an L21 test for someone who has it unless he also has a 67-marker haplotype and 492=12. I certainly would not offer to pay for the L21 test of a German with 390=23 and no 492 result to check! That would be like flushing money down the toilet.

« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 08:50:08 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #62 on: July 28, 2010, 08:47:18 AM »

I think a big part of the problem is the sampling process, like you said GoldenHind.

There is bound to be more P312* and subclades in Scandinavia. There are still some Danish and Dutch folks who are unaccounted for, yet L21+ on the FTDNA Haplotree page. But I know it is near impossible to contact them.

I have perused the Sorenson database and actually found a number of Scandinavian matches to the Irish Sea Modal. The Norwegian matches are really close to our Norwegian and Western Scottish L159+. So I think a complete, random sample like you guys are talking about would do wonders in improving our understanding of Scandinavian R1b1b2.

Neal,

All you are going to accomplish by finding matches to the "Irish Sea Modal" in Scandinavia is to bolster the idea that boatloads of Irish thralls were hauled there during the Viking Era. Honestly, that is the first impression that even I get when I hear of such a thing, and I definitely don't look for an Irishman under every rock.

Much as I am loath to admit it, there are several of our L21+ Scandinavian guys who appear to be of Scottish ancestry. There's no denying it. I don't think that means that all L21 in Scandinavia is necessarily of British Isles provenance, but it is a weakness when one tries arguing otherwise. Another of our L21+ Scandinavian guys has an ancestral surname most common in Austria.

I haven't investigated the P312* Scandinavian contingent closely, and I probably won't, but it is possible that not all of them are strictly Scandinavian either.

Of course, the same could be true of some of the U106 Scandinavians, as well.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 11:22:51 AM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #63 on: July 28, 2010, 12:08:57 PM »

I think a big part of the problem is the sampling process, like you said GoldenHind.

There is bound to be more P312* and subclades in Scandinavia. There are still some Danish and Dutch folks who are unaccounted for, yet L21+ on the FTDNA Haplotree page. But I know it is near impossible to contact them.

I have perused the Sorenson database and actually found a number of Scandinavian matches to the Irish Sea Modal. The Norwegian matches are really close to our Norwegian and Western Scottish L159+. So I think a complete, random sample like you guys are talking about would do wonders in improving our understanding of Scandinavian R1b1b2.
.... Much as I am loath to admit it, there are several of our L21+ Scandinavian guys who appear to be of Scottish ancestry. There's no denying it. I don't think that means that all L21 in Scandinavia is necessarily of British Isles provenance, but it is a weakness when one tries arguing otherwise. Another of our L21+ Scandinavian guys has an ancestral surname most common in Austria.
...
RMS2, which L21+ guys in Scandinavia do you think are of a Scottish lineage?  How do you know that it isn't the other way around... that the Scottish guys aren't of Scandinavian origin?
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #64 on: July 28, 2010, 12:37:35 PM »

Take a look at Ausland, kit 36081, Ysearch VVCYQ; Erickson, kit N5620, Ysearch nsp69; and Dundas, kit 82542, Ysearch XAVVM.

While it is remotely possible that all their numerous Scots matches are the descendants of Norwegians, it doesn't seem likely. Dundas actually has a family tradition of Scottish ancestry that predates his dna testing (not to mention a Scottish surname), and his genetic case for Scottish ancestry is weaker than the first two, in my opinion.

Those three I could think of off the top of my head. I would have to go back and look at the rest to see if there are any others.

« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 12:44:16 PM by rms2 » Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #65 on: July 28, 2010, 02:49:50 PM »

...my impression is that P312 (I'm talking about P312 as a whole, including all its subclades and not just R-P312*) is the biggest division of R1b1b2 in Europe, bigger than U106 and its clades. Therefore it is not at all surprising that the P312+ group as a whole rivals U106 in the old Germanic lands. But I think it is also true that the center of gravity of the P312+ group is more western than that of the U106+ group, which is why P312 is often associated with the Celts. In general (please note that I said, in general), the distribution of the P312+ group in Europe fits the Celtic pattern better than it does the Germanic pattern. And it does seem pretty apparent that the distribution of the U106+ group fits the Germanic pattern reasonably well.

I'm not trying to aggravate anyone, but I do think it is possible to generalize in this fashion, and I think it is necessary, too, if we are not to just throw up our hands and despair of ever making any sense of y haplogroups and their distribution. Does that mean there are no exceptions to the general pattern? Of course not. Obviously, there are exceptions. It's difficult, for example, to make the P312+ (all of it, not just R-P312*) in Scandinavia Celtic. But it is quite possible (and likely, it seems to me) that the P312+ in Scandinavia arrived there in the Bronze Age with the Beaker Folk, and the same people may have been Proto-Celts elsewhere. ..

As for R-P312*, if one wants to consider it as a single thing (which I think is a big mistake), the bulk of it is centered more in Iberia and France than in the old Germanic lands, and that is probably close to true of P312+ as a whole.

Following this excellent example, I've expanded on my bare list of haplogroups to say:

Quote
As we shall see, the Germani apparently sprang from a mixture of peoples. So it is no surprise that they did not have just one genetic marker, to judge by their descendants. If and when scientists find ancient Y-DNA from men that we can guess spoke Proto-Germanic, it is most likely to be a mixture of I1, R1a1a, R1b-U106 and R1b-P312, to name only the most common haplogroups. As mentioned in the Indo-European genetics section, R1a1a is shared by Germanic, Baltic and Slavic speakers. R1b-P312 peaks in western Europe and correlates best with the former Celtic and Italic speaking zone. Its subclade R1b-L21 is strongly concentrated in the more northerly former Celtic-speaking region. So the presence of R1b-P312* and R1b-L21 in present-day Germanic-speakers no doubt partly reflects migration from former Celtic areas into Scandinavia over the centuries, and partly the fact that Germanic speakers spread out over parts of the former Celtic area, absorbing existing populations as they went. Yet some may have arrived in Scandinavia in the Bronze Age with Bell Beaker folk or even Corded Ware. We should not imagine an impassible genetic divide between overlapping and interacting cultures.

R1b-U106 has its peak in northern Europe and a distribution which correlates fairly well with Germanic speakers, past and present. With an estimated date rather older than R1b-P312, it may have spread initially from the European steppe around 4000 BC among those who brought the Funnel Beaker Culture to Scandinavia and the Baltic. Or it may have been concentrated in the Usatovo Culture and spread north into Corded Ware. We can only speculate. Yet it seem safe to expect that it spread long before Proto-Germanic developed.

And hope not to get shot down in flames. :)
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 02:51:14 PM by Jean M » Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #66 on: July 28, 2010, 03:42:13 PM »

I think a big part of the problem is the sampling process, like you said GoldenHind.

There is bound to be more P312* and subclades in Scandinavia. There are still some Danish and Dutch folks who are unaccounted for, yet L21+ on the FTDNA Haplotree page. But I know it is near impossible to contact them.

I have perused the Sorenson database and actually found a number of Scandinavian matches to the Irish Sea Modal. The Norwegian matches are really close to our Norwegian and Western Scottish L159+. So I think a complete, random sample like you guys are talking about would do wonders in improving our understanding of Scandinavian R1b1b2.

Neal,

All you are going to accomplish by finding matches to the "Irish Sea Modal" in Scandinavia is to bolster the idea that boatloads of Irish thralls were hauled there during the Viking Era. Honestly, that is the first impression that even I get when I hear of such a thing, and I definitely don't look for an Irishman under every rock.

Much as I am loath to admit it, there are several of our L21+ Scandinavian guys who appear to be of Scottish ancestry. There's no denying it. I don't think that means that all L21 in Scandinavia is necessarily of British Isles provenance, but it is a weakness when one tries arguing otherwise. Another of our L21+ Scandinavian guys has an ancestral surname most common in Austria.

I haven't investigated the P312* Scandinavian contingent closely, and I probably won't, but it is possible that not all of them are strictly Scandinavian either.

Of course, the same could be true of some of the U106 Scandinavians, as well.

Rich,

I think there is some connection with the Irish Sea Modal and Scandinavia. It has to be more than coincidental that most of the Irish L159+ are from the counties of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, and Kildare - and right across the sea we can find L159 in Northern England-Scottish Borders.

L159 is also in the Hebrides, and I was really surprised when I found the Norwegians and other Scandinavians matching the signature. I am not coming to conclusions, but it almost looks like the dispersal could be due to Norse-Gaels. It's just a theory, but everyone has their own opinions of R1b1b2 in Scandinavia.

I just don't think L21 there is attributed to slaves.
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #67 on: July 28, 2010, 04:39:43 PM »



 
Quote
As we shall see, the Germani apparently sprang from a mixture of peoples. So it is no surprise that they did not have just one genetic marker, to judge by their descendants. If and when scientists find ancient Y-DNA from men that we can guess spoke Proto-Germanic, it is most likely to be a mixture of I1, R1a1a, R1b-U106 and R1b-P312, to name only the most common haplogroups. As mentioned in the Indo-European genetics section, R1a1a is shared by Germanic, Baltic and Slavic speakers. R1b-P312 peaks in western Europe and correlates best with the former Celtic and Italic speaking zone. Its subclade R1b-L21 is strongly concentrated in the more northerly former Celtic-speaking region. So the presence of R1b-P312* and R1b-L21 in present-day Germanic-speakers no doubt partly reflects migration from former Celtic areas into Scandinavia over the centuries, and partly the fact that Germanic speakers spread out over parts of the former Celtic area, absorbing existing populations as they went. Yet some may have arrived in Scandinavia in the Bronze Age with Bell Beaker folk or even Corded Ware. We should not imagine an impassible genetic divide between overlapping and interacting cultures.

R1b-U106 has its peak in northern Europe and a distribution which correlates fairly well with Germanic speakers, past and present. With an estimated date rather older than R1b-P312, it may have spread initially from the European steppe around 4000 BC among those who brought the Funnel Beaker Culture to Scandinavia and the Baltic. Or it may have been concentrated in the Usatovo Culture and spread north into Corded Ware. We can only speculate. Yet it seem safe to expect that it spread long before Proto-Germanic developed.

And hope not to get shot down in flames. :)

You have taken a middle ground which throws a bone of sorts to both sides. I suspect it is  probably fairly close to the mark. I do disagree with some of your statements.

.
While it probably correct as a generalization that overall P312, or at least a substantial portion of it, correlates best with former Celtic and Italic speaking zones, it really ignores a strong presence of some P312 in the Germanic speaking zone, as well as in other areas which have no connection with either the Celtic or Germanic peoples.

You suggest that the primary explanation for the presence of P312 in Germanic speaking areas is due to later migration or the incorporation of Celts into Germanic speaking peoples, and only allow for a possibility that some P312 "may" have arrived in the Bronze Age. There really isn't any proof of when the bulk of P312 arrived in Germanic speaking areas, and I can't see any reason to emphasize the former scenario over the latter. My suspicion is that at least two P312 subclades (L165 and S182) are likely to have a strong association with Scandinavia. If so, it will be very difficult to dismiss them as an incorporation of Celts or a result of modern migration.

The possible connection between U106 and the Funnel Beaker Culture is an interesting one. Incidentally, I recently read somewhere a suggestion that U106 represented the Bell Beakers.

I previously posted the Myres' study results from Denmark. Here are their results for Germany:

Sample size: 332

R1b-M269: 143 (43.1% of the total)

U106 (XU198): 62 (18.7%)

U198: 6 (1.8%)

U106 + U198: 68 (20.5%)

R1b-M269 (XU106,U198): 75 (22.6%)

Again it is reasonable to assume the latter group is all or very nearly all P312. This is a large sampling in a peer-reviewed study with some very respected names in the field.

Which is more likely, that P312 attained an apparent majority status in Germany solely due to the incorporation of Celts during the Iron Age and later migration, or that P312 had a strong presence amongst the Germanic speaking peoples dating to the Nordic Bronze Age?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 04:47:27 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #68 on: July 28, 2010, 07:11:41 PM »



Rich,

I think there is some connection with the Irish Sea Modal and Scandinavia. It has to be more than coincidental that most of the Irish L159+ are from the counties of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, and Kildare - and right across the sea we can find L159 in Northern England-Scottish Borders.

L159 is also in the Hebrides, and I was really surprised when I found the Norwegians and other Scandinavians matching the signature. I am not coming to conclusions, but it almost looks like the dispersal could be due to Norse-Gaels. It's just a theory, but everyone has their own opinions of R1b1b2 in Scandinavia.

I just don't think L21 there is attributed to slaves.

Neal,

L159 is young relative to L21 and virtually limited to Ireland, with perhaps some British additions. I think you are going to have a real uphill battle to convince anyone (even me, and I want to believe) that it was brought to Ireland from Scandinavia and not vice versa.

You would have to find enough L159 in Scandinavia to show its haplotypes are older there than in Ireland and the rest of the British Isles. I do wish you the best of success with that, but I doubt it can be done . . . ever.

I think the default setting on L159 in Scandinavia is the dreaded Viking Era slave trade. To a certain extent that may even be an element of L21 in Scandinavia as a whole.

But when you have a clade like L159 that shows up almost nowhere but Ireland and also pops up in a very few Scandinavians, what else can one reasonably conclude?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 07:13:23 PM by rms2 » Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #69 on: July 28, 2010, 07:14:56 PM »


You suggest that the primary explanation for the presence of P312 in Germanic speaking areas is due to later migration or the incorporation of Celts into Germanic speaking peoples, and only allow for a possibility that some P312 "may" have arrived in the Bronze Age.

I don't suggest anything as a primary reason.  I merely mention the possibility of Celtic input first, since that follows logically from the statements before that, which need to be first to make it crystal clear that P312 does not mean Germanic. It is not a Germanic marker and that needs to be said. I can't be much stronger than "may" have arrived with Bell Beaker, because I cannot prove that it did. But I could run to "reasonable supposition".  :)

[Added] Wording amended in the original.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 07:20:51 PM by Jean M » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #70 on: July 28, 2010, 07:27:56 PM »


. . .

Which is more likely, that P312 attained an apparent majority status in Germany solely due to the incorporation of Celts during the Iron Age and later migration, or that P312 had a strong presence amongst the Germanic speaking peoples dating to the Nordic Bronze Age?


I don't know, but I think it is entirely possible that there were enough Celts in Germany to account for the majority of German R1b1b2 lines, yes. I could be wrong, but I believe historically the southern and western parts of Germany have generally always been the most populous, and those were precisely the areas inhabited by Celts.

I used to teach German (but I am really rusty now), and I recall reading that High German (Hochdeutsch) actually shows signs of Celtic influence, whereas English is regarded as not showing much Celtic influence at all, even though we know what is now England was lousy with Celts.

As I recall from reading Gerhard Herm's The Celts, that German author considered the Celtic component to be the biggest part of what went into the German mix. He could have been wrong, I suppose.

Regarding the figures from Myres et al that you cited, I wouldn't disregard the P310- element in Germany, which would probably account for at least some of that xU106 stuff, enough to account for a few percent anyway.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #71 on: July 28, 2010, 07:46:48 PM »


You suggest that the primary explanation for the presence of P312 in Germanic speaking areas is due to later migration or the incorporation of Celts into Germanic speaking peoples, and only allow for a possibility that some P312 "may" have arrived in the Bronze Age.

I don't suggest anything as a primary reason.  I merely mention the possibility of Celtic input first, since that follows logically from the statements before that, which need to be first to make it crystal clear that P312 does not mean Germanic. It is not a Germanic marker and that needs to be said. I can't be much stronger than "may" have arrived with Bell Beaker, because I cannot prove that it did. But I could run to "reasonable supposition".  :)

[Added] Wording amended in the original.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your comments, but I took the following to have that meaning:

"So the presence of R1b-P312* and R1b-L21 in present-day Germanic-speakers no doubt partly reflects migration from former Celtic areas into Scandinavia over the centuries, and partly the fact that Germanic speakers spread out over parts of the former Celtic area, absorbing existing populations as they went."

I have never claimed that P312 is a Germanic marker. I also don't think it is entirely a Celtic marker. I don't think most would disagree with that.

What I do suspect, based on the strong presence of P312 in Scandinavia and in Germany, is that some portion of it was present in Scandinavia and northern Germany at least since the Nordic Bronze Age. In my opinion the circumstantial evidence in support of that proposition is fairly strong. That it may have arrived with the Bell Beakers is certainly a reasonable supposition, but of course other possibilities cannot be excluded at this point.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 08:03:55 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #72 on: July 28, 2010, 07:49:50 PM »

The best evidence comes from the % of various haplogroups in Scandinavia, rather than Germany. But even that is tricky, because modern populations are not safe proxies for ancient ones.  

  
Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #73 on: July 28, 2010, 07:52:56 PM »



Rich,

I think there is some connection with the Irish Sea Modal and Scandinavia. It has to be more than coincidental that most of the Irish L159+ are from the counties of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, and Kildare - and right across the sea we can find L159 in Northern England-Scottish Borders.

L159 is also in the Hebrides, and I was really surprised when I found the Norwegians and other Scandinavians matching the signature. I am not coming to conclusions, but it almost looks like the dispersal could be due to Norse-Gaels. It's just a theory, but everyone has their own opinions of R1b1b2 in Scandinavia.

I just don't think L21 there is attributed to slaves.

Neal,

L159 is young relative to L21 and virtually limited to Ireland, with perhaps some British additions. I think you are going to have a real uphill battle to convince anyone (even me, and I want to believe) that it was brought to Ireland from Scandinavia and not vice versa.

You would have to find enough L159 in Scandinavia to show its haplotypes are older there than in Ireland and the rest of the British Isles. I do wish you the best of success with that, but I doubt it can be done . . . ever.

I think the default setting on L159 in Scandinavia is the dreaded Viking Era slave trade. To a certain extent that may even be an element of L21 in Scandinavia as a whole.

But when you have a clade like L159 that shows up almost nowhere but Ireland and also pops up in a very few Scandinavians, what else can one reasonably conclude?

Hi Rich,

Actually the variance between samples is much higher in the Scandinavians. And L159 showing "up almost nowhere but Ireland" illustrates the lack of understanding of the subclade's presence in both Great Britain and Ireland. It is present considerably in Northern England, the Scottish Borders, Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Outer and Inner Hebrides, and in Northern Scotland near Caithness and Sutherland.

I am not here to convince anyone else, only myself of the patterns of L159. You are right that nothing is always certain in this field, but the clustering of the subclade in certain areas supports the settlement of Norse-Gaels. The Scandinavians I observed are located in More, Norway; Tromso, Norway; Aalborg, Denmark; and Kristianstad, Sweden.

I can reasonably conclude that there is an uncanny connection to the movements of Norse-Gaels.
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #74 on: July 28, 2010, 08:02:30 PM »



Hi Rich,

Actually the variance between samples is much higher in the Scandinavians. And L159 showing "up almost nowhere but Ireland" illustrates the lack of understanding of the subclade's presence in both Great Britain and Ireland. It is present considerably in Northern England, the Scottish Borders, Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Outer and Inner Hebrides, and in Northern Scotland near Caithness and Sutherland.

I am not here to convince anyone else, only myself of the patterns of L159. You are right that nothing is always certain in this field, but the clustering of the subclade in certain areas supports the settlement of Norse-Gaels. The Scandinavians I observed are located in More, Norway; Tromso, Norway; Aalborg, Denmark; and Kristianstad, Sweden.

I can reasonably conclude that there is an uncanny connection to the movements of Norse-Gaels.

Well, I have my doubts. For one thing, none of the Scandinavians you found in SMGF has been tested for L159. You can't really consider them until they have been tested.

Are you saying that the greatest proportion of L159 is something other than Irish?

Has it been found on the continent in any numbers?
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.121 seconds with 19 queries.